PART 4 OF SESSION 2 OF COURSE 1

So, you might add, "Could you tie all of these in to show a relationship between this and string theory?" Yes. Strings are very small components of phenomena. They are hard to detect. Most physicists consider studying these to be like studying magic. But they are wrong. The tool to understand what a string does and how it behaves is the consideration of the simplest relative discrete phenomena as a logical set of things that interact with simplicity. If the bases you piece together form a complex whole that makes sense and solves all documented research as to how particles behave, then it would appear that you are on the right track.
Verifying a theory makes a law. Laws are probable. Science is PATTERNED proof.
Being FAMILIAR with science leads to technology.
By piecing together CLUES, one may make more theories.
By forming a scenario, one may determine potential ROLE PLAYING.
By DISTINGUISHING one thing from another, one may discern what different things are in your studies.
Finally, by knowing how the components of your research are localized, the possible places that these components may be transferred to, and the limits of h ow these components behave, one may competently do scientific work.
As of the year 2001 (2009), scientists thought that you could not detect where an electron is and what it is giving off at the same time. (Heisendorf Principle).
If you know enough info, you know that the prior may at least be extrapolated when one considers the activity of the substringular. (The more refined the research, the more precise the results.) By understanding the nature of superstrings, you can show that usage of these through technology may prove what I am saying to be true.